A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE

One hears a lot of talk about privilege in anarchist circles these
days. “Male privilege”, “white-skin privilege”, “first-world privilege
and similar phrases come up regularly in discussion, but with no real
analysis to back them up, as if everyone should understand exactly what
is meant. And, indeed, it is not so difficult to figure out what is
meant
by these phrases. Their clear implication is that if the oppression and
exploitation one suffers in this society is not as intense as that
which
another suffers, then one is privileged relative to that other person.
But such a conception of privilege is useless from an anarchist and
revolutionary
perspective. It only has meaning in relation to the reformist concept
of equality before the law, which is always equality of exploitation
and oppression. For those of us who have no interest in rights, but
rather
want the freedom to determine our own lives and so find the only
equality
worth pursuing to be equality of access to all that is necessary for
determining the conditions of our existence—that is, for those of us
for whom the destruction of the social order and the revolutionary
transformation
of reality are the essential first steps toward making our lives our
own—a very different concept of privilege must be developed.

We live in a class society. This has been true since the
accumulation
of wealth and power into a few hands gave rise to the state and
capital.
The few who rule determine the conditions under which everyone exists,
institutionalizing social relations that maintain and expand their
control
over wealth and power. The ruling class structures these relations in
such a way that the survival of the exploited classes depends upon
their
continued participation in the reproduction of these relationships,
thus
guaranteeing the continuation of class society. Thus, it can be said
that the ruling class structures social relationships in such a way
that
the continued reproduction of society will always privilege the ruling
class and its needs. In any class society—thus, in any society in which
the state and the economy exist—only the ruling class can be truly said
to have privilege.

But the ruling class does not impose itself upon a passive populace.
The history of class society is always the history of class struggle,
the history of the exploited trying to take their lives and the social
conditions under which they exist back in order to determine them for
themselves. Thus, it is in the interest of the ruling class to
structure
social relations in such a way as to create divisions within the
exploited
classes that cloud their understanding of the nature of their struggle
and of their enemy. The ruling class accomplishes this through various
institutions, identities and ideologies such as nation, race, gender,
occupation, sexual preference and so on. It is not hard to see how the
ruling class uses these structures for its ends. It grants people in
specific social categories particular “privileges” defined in terms of
that category. But being granted a privilege by those who define your
life on their terms is not the same thing as having privilege. This
becomes
especially clear when anyone who is not of the ruling class steps out
of line. Their so-called privileges can quickly disappear.

Furthermore, these “privileges” granted by the ruling order to
people
in certain social categories among the exploited actually do amount to
nothing more than a lessening of the intensity of exploitation and
oppression
experienced by these people relative to others. Thus, men are less
likely
to be sexually harassed and assaulted than women and tend to receive
greater compensation for the same level of exploitation at the job.
White
people are less likely to be harassed by cops or to be charged with
felonies
for victimless crimes and sentenced to years in prison than non-white
people and find it easier to get a job. Heterosexuals generally do not
have to worry about being beaten or ostracized because of their sexual
preference. The list could go on, but I think the point is clear. All
of these so-called privileges are nothing more than a minimal easing
of the conditions of exploitation experienced by people in these
specific
social categories. They are intended to convince these people that they
have more in common with their exploiters than with those not granted
the same “privileges” and to convince the others that their real enemy
is not the ruling class, but rather those granted a less intense level
of exploitation.

In this light, moralistic calls to recognize one’s own privilege and
give it up are meaningless. They serve no purpose in the creation of
a revolutionary project aimed at the destruction of all rule. As we
have
seen, the so-called privileges enumerated in the mea culpas of guilt
ridden radicals are really nothing more than means for constructing
social
identities that serve the ruling class by producing artificial
divisions
among those they exploit. So if we want to move the revolutionary
project
of destroying all rule and privilege forward, then our task is not to
give up some phantom privilege that has never really been our own, but
to expose and move beyond the artificial identities that smother our
individuality and cripple us in our battle against the ruling order.
Since only the ruling class truly has privilege, the destruction of
privilege
will only occur when we destroy all rule.